Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dk4vv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-03T11:47:04.322Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

4 - Screening for Lung Cancer

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 August 2009

By
Thomas E. Hartman
Edited by
Sujal R. Desai
Thomas E. Hartman
Affiliation:
Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
Sujal R. Desai
Affiliation:
King's College Hospital, London
Get access

Summary

Introduction

To screen or not to screen? That is the question! The current debate continues. Compelling reasons for both optimism and doubt about the effectiveness of screening have been voiced in the literature and at medical conferences worldwide. The aim of this chapter will be to provide some background on lung cancer, the rationale for screening and the outcome of previous screening trials. It will also attempt to frame the debate regarding CT screening for lung cancer by presenting its potential benefits and potential risks. It will then be up to the reader to decide his or her own position about CT.

Background

Lung cancer is the most common fatal malignancy in the United States and deaths from lung cancer exceed the combined total of breast, colorectal and prostate carcinomas which are the three next most common causes of cancer deaths. It is estimated that 174,000 new cases and 160,000 deaths from lung cancer occurred in the United States in 2004. If mortality rates remain stable, over 1 million Americans will die of lung cancer in the next seven years. However, if there was an effective screening tool for lung cancer that resulted in a 10% mortality reduction an estimated 16,000 lives per year in the US could be saved. Breast, colorectal and prostate carcinomas all have relatively effective screening processes in place, which have demonstrated mortality reduction. It is these past successes for screening upon which the hope for lung cancer screening is founded.

Type
Chapter
Information
Lung Cancer , pp. 46 - 56
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2006

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Greenlee, R. T., Hill-Harmon, M. B., Murray, T. (2001). Cancer Statistics 2001. CA Cancer J Clin, 51, 15–36.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Flehinger, B. J., Melamed, M. R. (1994). Current status of screening for lung cancer. Chest Surg Clinic N Am, 4, 1–15.Google ScholarPubMed
Pairolero, P. C., Williams, D. E., Bergstralh, E. J., et al. (1984). Postsurgical stage I bronchogenic carcinoma: morbid implications of recurrent disease. Ann Thorac Surg, 38, 331–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martini, N., Bains, M. S., Burt, M. E., et al. (1995). Incidence of local recurrence and second primary tumors in resected stage I lung cancer. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg, 109, 120–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Harpole, D. H., Herndon, J. E., Wolfe, W. G., Iglehart, J. D., Marks, J. R. (1995). A prognostic model of recurrence and death in stage I non-small cell lung cancer utilizing presentation, histopathy, and oncoprotein expression. Cancer Res, 55, 51–6.Google Scholar
Gail, M. H., Eagan, R. T., Feld, R., et al. (1984). Prognostic factors in patients with resected stage I non-small cell lung cancer. A report from the Lung Cancer Study Group. Cancer Res, 54, 1802–13.Google Scholar
Frost, J. K., Ball, W. C., Levin, M. L., Tockman, M. S., Baker, R. R., Carter, D., et al. (1984). Early lung cancer detection: results of the initial (prevalence) radiologic and cytologic screening in the Johns Hopkins study. Am Rev Respir Disease, 130, 549–4.Google Scholar
Flehinger, B. J., Melamed, M. R., Zaman, M. B., Heelan, R. T., Perchick, W. B., Martini, N. (1984). Early lung cancer detection: results of the initial (prevalence) radiologic and cytologic screening in the Memorial Sloan-Kettering study. Am Rev Respir Disease, 130, 555–60.Google ScholarPubMed
Fontana, R. S., Sanderson, D. R., Taylor, W. F., et al. (1984). Early lung cancer detection: results of the initial (prevalence) radiologic and cytologic screening in the Mayo Clinic study. Am Rev Respir Disease, 130, 561–5.Google ScholarPubMed
Kubik, A., Parkin, D. M., Khlat, M., et al. (1990). Lack of benefit from semi-annual screening for lung cancer of the lung: followup report of randomized controlled trial on a population of high risk males in Czechoslovakia. Int J Cancer, 45, 26–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marcus, P. M., Bergstralh, E. J., Fagerstrom, R. M., Williams, D. E., Fontana, R. S., Taylor, W. F., et al. (2000). Lung cancer mortality in the Mayo Lung Project: impact of extended follow-up. J Natl Cancer Inst, 92, 1309–16.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kaneko, M., Eguchi, K., Ohmatsu, H., et al. (1996). Peripheral lung cancer: screening and detection with low-dose spiral CT versus radiography. Radiology, 201, 798–802.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Henschke, C. I., McCauley, D. I., Yankelevitz, D. F., et al. (1999). Early lung cancer action project: overall design and findings from baseline screening. Lancet, 354, 99–105.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Swensen, S., Jett, J. R., Hartman, T. E., Midthun, D. E., Mandrekar, S. J., Hillman, S. L., et al. (2005). CT screening for lung cancer: Five-year prospective experience. Radiology, 235, 259–65.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Aloia, T., Bepler, G., Harpole, Dea. (2001). Integration of peripheral blood biomarkers with computed tomography to differentiate benign from malignant pulmonary opacities. Cancer Detect Prev, 25, 336–43.Google ScholarPubMed
Khan, N., Cromer, C. J., Campa, M., Patz, E. F. (2004). Clinical utility of serum amyloid A and macrophage migration inhibitory factor as serum biomarkers for the detection of nonsmall cell lung carcinoma. Cancer, 101, 379–84.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Phillips, M., Cotareo, R. N., Cummin, A. R. C. (2003). Detection of lung cancer with volatile markers in breath. Chest, 123, 2115–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Henschke, C. I., Yankelevitz, J. F., Naidich, J. P., et al. (2004). CT screening for lung cancer: suspiciousness of nodules according to size on baseline scans. Radiology, 231, 164–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Midthun, D. E., Swensen, S. J., Jett, J. R., Hartman, T. E. (2003). Evaluation of nodules detected by screening for lung cancer with low-dose spiral CT. Lung Cancer, 41, 40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Swensen, S. J., Vigianno, R. W., Midthun, J. E., et al. (2000). Lung nodule enhancement at CT: multicenter study. Radiology, 214, 73–80.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gould, M. K., et al. (2001). Accuracy of positron emission tomography for diagnosis of pulmonary nodules and mass lesions. JAMA, 285, 914–24.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Howard, B. A., Wang, M. Z., Campa, M. J., et al. (2003). Identification and validation of a potential lung cancer serum biomarker detected by matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization-time of flight spectra analysis. Proteomics, 3, 1720–4.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Swensen, S. J., Jett, J. R., Sloan, J. A., et al. (2002). Screening for lung cancer with low-dose spiral computed tomography. Am J Respir Crit Care Med, 165, 508–13.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kent, K. C., Zwolak, R. M., Jaff, M. R., et al. (2004). Screening for abdominal aortic aneurysm: a consensus statement. Journal of Vascular Surgery, 39, 267–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schwartz, L. M., Woloshim, S., Fowler, F-T. Jr, Welch, H. G. (2004). Enthusiasm for cancer screening in the United States. JAMA, 291, 71.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hasegawa, M., Sone, S., Takashima, S., et al. (2000). Growth rate of small lung cancers detected on mass CT screening. Br J Radiology, 73, 1252–59.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gentleman, J. F., Pleis, J. R. (2002). The National Health Interview Survey: An Overview. EFF Clinic Pract, 5, 3.Google ScholarPubMed
Sone, S., Takashima, S., Li, F., et al. (1998). Mass screening for lung cancer with mobile spiral computed tomography scanner. Lancet, 351, 1242–5.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
DeVita, V. T. Jr, Young, R. C., Casellos, G. P. (1975). Combination versus single agent chemotherapy: a review of the basis for selection of drug treatment of cancer. Cancer, 35, 98–110.3.0.CO;2-B>CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Folkman, J. (1995). Seminars in medicine of The Beth Israel Hospital, Boston. Clinical applications of research on angiogenesis. N Engl J Med, 333, 1757–63.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rak, J. W., St Croix, B. D., Herbel, R. S. (1995). Consequences of angiogenesis for tumor progression, metastasis and cancer therapy. Anti-Cancer Drugs, 6, 3–18.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Liotta, L. A., Kleinerman, J., Saidel, G. M. (1974). Quantitative relationships of intravascular tumor cells, tumor vessels and pulmonary metastases following tumor implantation. Cancer Research, 34, 997–1004.Google ScholarPubMed
Yang, M., Hasegawa, S., Jiang, P., et al. (1998). Widespread skeletal metastatic potential of human lung cancer revealed by green fluorescent protein expression. Cancer Res, 58, 4217–21.Google ScholarPubMed
Swartz, M. A., Kristensen, C. A., Melder, R. J., et al. (1999). Cells shed from tumors show reduced clonogenicity, resistance to apoptosis and in vivo tumorigenicity. Brit Cancer, 81, 756–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mack, M. J., Hazelrigg, S. R., Landreneau, R. J., Acuff, T. E. (1993). Thoracoscopy for the diagnosis of the indeterminate solitary pulmonary nodule. Ann Thorac Surg, 56, 825–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kim, H., Lee, K. S., Primack, S. L., et al. (2002). Small pulmonary nodules on CT accompanying surgically resectable lung cancer: likelihood of malignancy. J Thoracic Imaging, 17, 40–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Diederich, S., Wormanns, D., Semik, M., Thomas, M., Lenzen, H., Roos, N., et al. (2002). Screening for early lung cancer with low-dose spiral CT: prevalence in 817 asymptomatic smokers. Radiology, 222, 773–81.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Romano, P. S., Mark, D. H. (1992). Patient and hospital characteristics related to in-hospital mortality after lung cancer resection. Chest, 101, 1332–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brenner, D. J. (2004). Radiation risks potentially associated with low-dose CT screening of adult smokers for lung cancer. Radiology, 231, 440–5.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mahadevia, P. J., Fleisher, L. A., Frick, K. D., et al. (2003). Lung cancer screening with helical computed tomography in older adult smokers: a decision and cost-effectiveness analysis. JAMA, 289, 313–22.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Aberle, D. R., et al. (2004). National Lung Screening Trial (NLST). A Research Study for Smokers and Ex-smokers, NIH Protocol.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×